Pages

November 3, 2009

The city put out a press release today responding to stories that its Loan Board of Review illegally voted by email. Here's a breakdown of the press release, including a major omission:

1. The press release was emailed by Deputy City Attorney Scott Letteney, but was titled: "City of Racine Press Release" and was unsigned.

2. The press release noted the Loan Board of Review was created in 1979. It's made up of specific city staff members (and no elected officials).

3. At the Loan Board of Review's June 18, 2009 meeting, the board deferred action on developer Jim Spodick's request to reduce a city loan to wait for a financial analyst's report, according to the release. RacinePost filed an open records request Tuesday for a copy of the analyst's report.

4. The Loan Board of Review's email vote was done to expedite Spodick's sale of the Wilmanor Apartments, according to the press release. It also suggests the vote was in the city's interest, which allows officials to balance the city's interest against the state's open meetings law.

5. The press release then disassociates Spodick's $650,000 claim against the city from the Loan Board of Review's actions. It suggests that Spodick made a deal with former Mayor Gary Becker and that deal is under review as part of a larger review of Spodick's claim.

6. Missing from the press release is any mention of the Loan Board of Review's odd/dishonest/potentially illegal decision to alter the official minutes of the June 18, 2009 meeting to reflect a vote that never occurred.

7. The JT continues to pump this story, which they learned about by reading RacinePost. They've asked the state Attorney General's office for a ruling on the email vote. The AG responded that a decision could take a couple of weeks.

8. This entire incident is potentially embarrassing for the city because it involves senior city officials, including City Attorney Rob Weber, who is well-versed in the state's open meetings law. Weber's involvement makes it an interesting choice to have the city's official response come out of his office.

9. Mayor John Dickert banned email votes in city government today. Since email votes are already illegal (in order for any public body to vote, they have to hold a public meeting), his word should be followed.

Does that mean there is no problem with a person as long as Dustin Block has no problem with them? I know a lot of people who have issues with Letteny. But hey, Dustin has no problem with him so everythings cool.

The bigger issue that needs to be viewed is the number of side deals made by Becker that keep coming to light now that he is gone.To name a few:1. The current loan issue goes back to a Becker promise.2. The metal artwork on Washington in Uptown goes back to a Becker promise.3. The SCJ property tax deal that Becker even got Doyle to support in Madison on a Becker promise.

There are probably more side deals out there too. Each deal seems to have a similar trend. Money for some pet Becker project. Questions about City staff involvement. No real value for the City long-term.

Put these issues together with the long list of bad department head hires due to lack of proper background checking and you find a pretty poor legacy.

Dickert needs to get his arms around these issues in total and take some actions to make sure these things don't happen again. If staff are involved some accountability for the actions needs to be taken too.

The legality of email votes is just NOW coming to light in city hall?For how many years has City Hall been voting by email, and no one has yet to get a ruling or an opinion from a qualified source.Weber should be fired, immediately.Someone is either ignoring their responsibilities, or is lying.

Anon 7:23, just because you think the "Spodick issue" is bigger than the "e-mail issue," doesn't minimize the fact that the city council is acting in direct opposition to state law. Our elected officials should always cast their votes in the open, in the face of the public they are supposed to represent so we can see who is truly representing our best interests at the time of the vote, and who is not.

Anon 7:51, you have obviously never been to an open hearing. Think back only a few months ago when the city council wanted to force citizens to participate in a historical district that would have cost them (collectively over time) hundreds of thousands, or even millions, of dollars. Thanks to the open meeting, that proposal was killed.

Anon 8:20, concrete katie, right on!

Anon 10:29, if, in fact, Weber knew of these e-mail votings, then I agree, he should be fired immediately.

Anon 11:19, I don't understand how you can hold Dickert responsible for deals made by Becker. I don't support Dickert, but I will not lay blame at his feet for something that is clearly not of his doing. Should he look into any previous deals made by Becker? Yes. But, he can only do so if they are already known, or when they come to light. Lighten up, man.

I think that Dickert has done the right thing in putting a halt to these e-mail votes. Any further use of them by any member of the city council should result in their immediate dismissal, even if it's only a preliminary vote amongst the members just to see where they stand. That is still a vote behind the public's back. Dickert ran part of his campaign on "transparency in government." He needs to hold to that, and we need to make him do so.

First off it been stated it was an electronic poll, I don't see any trouble with this. From what I understand it seems as if the official vote was taken at the meeting. Furthermore I think the post needs to get their own facts straight. From their original posting 10/29/2009"Interestingly, one thing not reflected in the July 16 meeting is the board's decision to alter its June minutes to reflect a new reality. We only know that occurred because former Alderman Pete Karas attended the meeting and observed the changes to the minutes. Here's another mystery: The city's official online records have two separate sets of minutes for one meeting. ONE SET MENTIONS THE "ELECTRONIC POLLS". ONE DOES NOT".

Confused? So are we, because the board's actions don't make sense. It's clearly illegal under state law to vote by email, and it's highly questionable to re-write minutes to reflect actions the board didn't take. The issue gets murkier when the reason for the vote is considered"

this was in your original post, however if you follow your own links for the two sets of minutes you can clearly see 1 is the MINUTES and the other is the MEETINGS AGENDA. These are 2 seperate things and the post should really be able to tell the difference between the two. I will give you credit you have created alot of false intrigue and drama.

Graham: The email vote, the initial vote, and the subsequent vote all took place under Dickert. The erasing of the minutes also took place under Dickert. If this was a shady deal that Becker did then it should be corrected out in the open. Two wrongs do not make a right and this is going to cost us, the taxpayers, a ton of money because the city violated open meeting laws, changed records, and lied.

The issues reviewed I raised as Anon 8:20 AM are not Dickert apology statements. They are statement of fact related to the past mayor. If the problems continue or similar new issues come up under Dickert then I will highlight those actions too.

It is called accountability. Please note, I indicated the staff involved should be looked at too.

Stop being blind to the fact that Dickert is involved in these many wrongdoings. If he nothing to do with any of this, he should fire Brian O'connell immediately. But since he does have something to do with it, he has to protect Brian otherwise he'll rat him out and let the public know that Brian was acting on orders from Mayor Dicker.The only thing transparent at city hall is the glass in the windows.

Anon 2:04, I was not citing the e-mail vote or changing of minutes. Yes, I know that took place on Dickert's watch and he should address these issues. I was referring specifically to Becker backroom deals. Little Johnny can not be held accountable for something he had nothing to do with, unless of course he finds out about them and furthers them, which has not been the case thus far, as far as we know.

Transparent Racine, it is obvious from Dickert's conduct prior to, and since, his election that he's no choir boy. He may be, next to Becker, the worst mayor Racine has ever seen (can you say “10 Year Plan” and “Higher Taxes?”).The next mayoral election will show the character and intelligence of the voters in this city. If Dickert wins again it will show the lack of them.

The blame lies squarely with Rob Weber. The other board members are City Employees. They are not the brightest bulbs in the marquee, but (like City Council), defer to the City Attorney on matters of legal procedure.